Key result
MR-proANP demonstrated superior diagnostic accuracy for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction compared to NT-proBNP, with an area under the curve of 0.844 versus 0.518 (P < 0.001).
Why the study?
Does MR-proANP improve diagnostic accuracy for HFpEF compared to NT-proBNP in patients with cardiovascular disease?
Cross-Sectional (n=190)
No
Does MR-proANP improve diagnostic accuracy for HFpEF compared to NT-proBNP in patients with cardiovascular disease?
Absolute Event Rate: 0.844% vs 0.518%
p-value: p=<0.001
MR-proANP demonstrates superior diagnostic accuracy compared to NT-proBNP for identifying heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, likely reflecting its sensitivity to atrial volume overload.
May support further HFpEF diagnostic evaluation; leaves open need for prospective validation before clinical adoption.
OBJECTIVES: To explore that if mid-regional sequence of pro-A-type natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP) may have a good value of diagnosis in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) compared with N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP). METHODS: Participants with cardiovascular disease who were enrolled in this study were divided into the nonheart failure (non-HF) group (n = 75), HFpEF group (n = 65), and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) group (n = 50). The MR-proANP and NT-proBNP levels in plasma from all patients were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RESULTS: The plasma levels of MR-proANP and NT-proBNP in HFpEF and HFrEF groups were higher than those in non-HF group (P < .05). MR-proANP levels were significantly different (P < .05) in different New York Heart Association class patients with HFpEF. In the diagnostic analysis area under the curve of MR-proANP (0.844) was higher than that of NT-proBNP (0.518, P < .001). The left atrial volume index in the HFrEF group was higher than HFpEF group (P < .05); however, both of these groups had a higher index than non-HF group (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Results indicated that MR-proANP may be more sensitive and specific than NT-proBNP in diagnosing HFpEF. It may be used as a potential diagnostic biomarker in patients with HFpEF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cui et al. (2018) conducted a cross-sectional in Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (n=190). MR-proANP vs. NT-proBNP was evaluated on Diagnostic accuracy (Area Under the Curve) for HFpEF (95% CI 0.784-0.905, p=<0.001). MR-proANP demonstrated superior diagnostic accuracy for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction compared to NT-proBNP, with an area under the curve of 0.844 versus 0.518 (P < 0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: